1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a sock donning assist device and, more particularly, to a device which enables an individual to put on a sock, stocking, or like foot covering with great ease.
2. Description of the Prior Art
Many devices have been proposed for the express purpose of facilitating the donning of a foot covering, such as a sock or stocking, by a person whose body movement is somehow limited by reason of injury, old age, pregnancy, or the like.
I am, in fact, aware of the following U.S. Pat. Nos. whose teachings are generally directed towards such devices: 1,315,096; 2,828,057; 2,919,840; 3,070,271; 3,231,160; 3,452,907; 3,604,604; 3,692,217; 3,715,065; 3,727,812; 3,808,008; 3,853,252; and 3,860,156.
Of the foregoing, U.S. Pat. No. 3,715,065 to Peck is typical in illustrating a U-shaped tubular member having a closed end and curved side portions. A sock is placed onto holders which extend from the free end of the curved side portions in such a fashion to enable same to be drawn onto the foot of the user.
U.S. Pat. No. 1,315,096 to Deiley teaches a sock puller which utilizes a pair of handle members which, when pressure is applied, act to separate a pair of arcuate support members which fit into the open end of a sock so as to expand same when pressure is applied to the handle.
The MacLauchlan U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,452,907 and 2,828,057 teach the provision of a pair of strap members which terminate in a garter that is clamped to the edge of the sock, the strap members being used in combination with another device for guiding the sock or stocking onto the foot.
While each of the above-cited devices is directed towards the same end, I have found their structures to be deficient in several respects. One of the more serious disadvantages of the prior art devices is the failure to provide for any give or resiliency in the devices which, in turn, can make the utilization thereof a painful experience. Further, the sock gripping and pulling devices are generally far too complex, require a multitude of parts, some of which must be manufactured to close tolerances and/or are moving parts, and are generally, therefore, quite expensive.
A more serious objection to the prior art devices concerns their difficulty in use. It appears that the devices of the prior art would require a large amount of time-consuming effort and energy which may be far beyond the capacities of those individuals for whom such devices are mostly needed.
Another disadvantage to the devices of the prior art is that there exists no convenient or easily operable means for releasing the sock from the devices after the sock has been donned. With many of the devices, the user must perform physical acrobatics, the need for which such devices were originally designed to prevent, in order to simply release the sock after it has been donned. Clearly, the situation is in need of remedy.
Another disadvantage of the prior art devices is that, generally speaking, they are not adjustable to individuals having different foot sizes, sock sizes, or statures, which requires a plurality of different sized assist devices to be manufactured at concomitant increased costs and expense to the consumer.